SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

January 2006

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Axel Thimm <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Scientific Linux Users <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 20:06:44 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/signed
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (993 bytes) , application/pgp-signature (194 bytes)
On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 07:38:36PM +0100, Jaroslaw Polok wrote:
> No, you shall see no problems activating above: however in the past
> there were some conflicts between DAG repo and ATrpms repo: I
> believe this is resolved by now (Axel, the ATrpms maintainer reads
> this list so maybe he could confirm ?)

(Most) ATrpms libraries have been repackaged in such a way that
different major lib versions can coexist, so when a repo upgrades
libfoo from libfoo.so.2 to libfoo.so.3 no conflicts arise. That has
been quite some help in improving interrepo compatibility.

Currently and for some time there haven't been reports on such
conflicts, but when any such conflict does arise it gets dealt with in
rather fast time. bugzilla.atrpms.net is a common place to report bugs
per repo and interrepo bugs, too. It is shared by all non redhat.com
hosted repos.

Bottom line: If there appear any conflicts (not only between the two
mentioned repos, but in general), just let both sides know.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net


ATOM RSS1 RSS2